HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes Sub 06-04-021,1`I y G`'`y of Cq,9y C ity
CARMEL /CLAY PLAN COMMISSION
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE
JUNE 4
The regularly scheduled meeting of the Subdivision Committee met at 7:00 PM in the Caucus Rooms
of City Hall, Carmel, Indiana
Members present were: Dave Cremeans, Chairperson; Wayne Haney; and Norma Meighen. Also in
attendance was Marilyn Anderson, ex- officio.
Michael Hollibaugh was in attendance representing the Department of Community Services.
1. Docket No. 44 -02 PP; Aberdeen Bend Subdivision (Primary Plat)
The applicant seeks approval to plat a 50 -lot residential subdivision on 36.88± acres. The
site is located on the north side of West 131S Street, t/2 mile west of Towne Road. The
site is zoned S- I /Residence Very Low Density.
Filed by Jonathan Moen of Mid States Engineering for The Jones Company.
Jonathan Moen of Mid States Engineering was present representing the applicant. Bill Blake of
The Jones Company and Alan Klineman, land owner, were also present.
In Chris White's absence, Alan Klineman made a presentation to the Committee. The proposed
subdivision conforms to the current zoning. There is a total of 39.2% Common Area /Open Space
with 50 lots on approximately 37 acres. The Jones Company based in St. Louis has moved into
the Carmel market and will build homes from $260,000 and up to $400,000.
All issues have been addressed, although there were a few concerns indicated in the Department
Report pertaining to drainage. The drainage runs to the east and the proposed development will
not be adding to the flow, rather, there will be drainage pipes installed along the western boundary
that will probably relieve some of the drainage problems in the area.
Lighting Clarification: There is a covenant in existence that states the only lighting will be on
each lot, dusk -to -dawn lights—no street lights.
The cul -de -sac at the end of Truman Place works well as it is, and it will be landscaped. The
property to the south has not yet been developed and there is no knowledge of what the plan
might be for that property.
S:\PlanCommission\Minutes\SubdivisionCommitteeMinutes\2002junO4
Jonathan Moen said the Hamilton County Surveyor had requested a drainage pipe be installed to
the property line, the western boundary. The County's intent is to take the pipe to Shelborne in
the future. Karen Young was still concerned with the location of the gazebo and had asked about
moving it away from her animals. Mr. Moen said they were willing to move the gazebo.
The petitioner is willing to plant evergreens (Not White Pines) on the berms. The landscape plan
is subject to Scott Brewer's approval. Mike Hollibaugh concurred with the drainage report. The
County Surveyor is requiring the drain to be extended so that Aberdeen will accept off -site
flow —there were no other issues. The property to the south is not developed at all and no plans
are known at present.
Remonstrance:
Ray Fillmore, 13214 Towne Road, Carmel, was hopeful that this development would back up to
his property
Tonia Guerrero, 2424 West 131S Street, was concerned about school buses. School buses will
stop and pick -up and discharge children.
Marilyn Anderson moved to recommend approval to the full Commission, subject to Scott
Brewer's approval of the final landscape plan; seconded by Norma Meighen. The motion was
approved 4 -0.
Note: Items 2, 3, and 4 were heard together. Judy Hester, legal counsel, was in attendance for
the discussion on the Village of WestClay.
2. Docket No. 10 -02 Z; Village of West Clay Rezone
The petitioner seeks approval to rezone an area on the West side of Towne Road (within
the existing PUD) from Secondary Area to Primary Area. The site is generally located at
the southwest corner of West 131S Street and Towne Road. The site is zoned
PUD /Planned Unit Development.
Filed by Jose Kreutz of Brenwick TND Communities, LLC.
3. Docket No. 11 -02 OA; Village of West Clay PUD Text Amendment
Petitioner seeks favorable recommendation of a text amendment to a PUD /planned unit
development district. The site is generally located at the southeast corner of West 131S
Street and Towne Road. The site is zoned PUD /Planned Unit Development.
Filed by Jose Kreutz of Brenwick TND Communities, LLC.
4. Docket No. 12 -02 PP Amend; Village of West Clay Primary Plat Amendment
Petitioner seeks approval of an amendment to the Primary Plat for an area of the Village of
West Clay on the west side of Towne Road. The site is generally located at the southwest
corner of West 131S Street and Towne Road. The site is zoned PUD /Planned Unit
Development.
Filed by Jose Kreutz of Brenwick TND Communities, LLC.
S:AP1anCommission\ Minutes\ SubdivisionCoimnitteeMinutes \2002jun04 2
Jose Kreutz was present representing the petitioner. Tom Huston, developer and partner of
George Sweet, was also in attendance.
The Subdivision Committee had forwarded a positive recommendation to the full Commission,
subject to discussion on the following items. 1) Commercial development on the west side of
Towne Road. Previously, the applicant discussed with the Plan Commission no mixed -use or
commercial structures located anywhere in the primary area, the secondary area, or any area west
of Towne Road. 2) There will be no Inns permitted anywhere west of Towne Road. The
amended primary plat for that portion of the Village west of Towne Road proposes a limit of
residential components to no more than two home that are attached. None of the lots along 131S
Street or 126 Street will be permitted to have two -home, attached dwelling types. What is a
two -home, attached dwelling? Two examples are currently found in the Village of WestClay.
One home is considerably larger than the other and they look like two separate homes. However,
an inspection of the rear shows two garages attached by a shared wall. The purpose of attaching
garages is two -fold: the market requires garages to be sized larger, and because of the size of the
garage, the builder in conjunction with two separate owners of the real estate, tried to combine
the garages and give a more aesthetic view along the rear.
Regarding an auto service station—definition and use —Jose Kreutz said a key item is that service
includes bodywork, in a fully enclosed service bay, or shielded from adjacent properties. The
second key item is that it must substantially conform with the design of the Development Plan
currently in effect. The building would be Italianatte, presumably at the corner of the Village
Center. Another point is that at the price per square foot and per acre, the market will limit what
may or may not happen on the property. Having service available is a must and it would not be
economically feasible to just sell gas.
The Village Center comprises six blocks —the Meeting House, Office Building, two apartment
blocks —the service station could be located on Block D, E, or F. Again, based on lot prices
recommended for the real estate, we feel the service station will be a benefit, and it would not
damage anyone else except Brenwick.
Jose summarized by saying that 4 units, attached, is not a good home on the west side of Towne
Road. No more than 2 units, attached, will give some architectural flexibility and may not be
along 126 Street or 131S Street, still 187 lots, a density of 2.0 units per acre. There is no open
space requirement on any portion of the project. The definition of a service station is being
restricted so that it will address the issue of a "junk yard."
Marilyn Anderson said she had a problem with the density. Initially, the density was supposed to
be centered around the Village and radiating out, it was to be less dense, and west of Towne
Road was supposed to closely match the existing zoning. At 187 lots, there would be a density of
1.82.
Jose responded the Ordinance requires flexibility to change a block of lots.
S:AP1anCommission\ Minutes\ SubdivisionCoimnitteeMinutes \2002jun04 3
Michael Hollibaugh confirmed that the Ordinance does allow a certain amount of flexibility to
make some modifications. The gross density of the overall project is 2.0 units per acre, and they
are still less than the overall.
Marilyn Anderson spoke again about the density and did not want a "domino affect" wherein
there are small lots, and the next property ends up to be small lots too.
Michael Hollibaugh said they cannot do that without coming back to the Plan Commission. Given
the character of the development today and the person able to make an investment in a home
there, it seems the density issue becomes insignificant when the rest of the development pattern
area is well established with really nice production homes. If this project has been approved, we
need to do whatever we can to make sure it succeeds. We don't want it to go south, and we
don't want more square footage built for less money. It would seem that the incremental change
being requested is consistent with everything presented up to this point. The Department would
like to see as much flexibility on the density issue to allow them to do what they feel needs to
happen.
Dave Cremeans described this as a "doughnut and a hole in the middle." The super dense area
would be contained in a very low density zone in the center of the doughnut. The surrounding
areas would more closely resemble what we felt the rest of WestClay would look like, based upon
the zoning, the maps available, discussions held, the 20/20 Vision Plan, etc., all designated at very
low density. We have a high- density project going into a very low- density area and we are only
trying to contain it. We don't want it creeping outside of the hole in the doughnut. Changing this
to a primary area does change the density allowed.
Michael Hollibaugh explained that there are two areas, the primary and the secondary area. The
primary area actual density is 2.0 and cannot change. The secondary area density cannot exceed
1.3. However, it can shift from one parcel as long as, overall, the density does not exceed 1.3.
Mr. Huston had the following comments: Initially there was a great concern about density and
there were some remonstrators that were concerned about lots that would abut their property.
An overall, controlling density requirement was established whereby the aggregate density could
not exceed 2.0 units per acre. Control number two was that the aggregate density in the
secondary area, however defined, could not exceed 1.3 units per acre. That was not on a parcel
by- parcel basis, it was the aggregate, secondary area, average density of 1.3. No limitation was
specified in the density in the primary area because that is accomplished by deduction. If you start
with 2.0 and you take the secondary acreage of 1.3, and subtract that from the aggregate of 2.0
units, that tells you how many units are left over and that is permitted in the primary area. We
also specifically provided that along what was then Hoover Road's border with Claridge Farms, a
buffering protection was to be provided. Where there is an aggregate house value of $280,000
average, our average for the Village product is $400,000. The Village product on a small lot has
numerically been the most successful product in the Village of WestClay —the reason being the
market doesn't have any other alternative.
Mr. Huston went on to say that the duplexes are basically a single house with an attached garage.
This allows for the house to be constructed on a 30 -foot wide duplex lot. This allows for a buyer
S:AP1anCommission\ Minutes\ SubdivisionCoimnitteeMinutes \2002jun04 4
to have virtually zero yard maintenance. We have had lengthy discussions with the neighbors and
have provided landscaping so that they will not be offended by the smaller homes adjacent to their
homes. The reality is that the rest of western Clay Township has been committed to production
houses and there are very few parcels left. We are the last, large, custom home community in
western Clay Township and trying to maintain standards consistent with that and price levels
consistent. We want to be good neighbors as well as build good neighborhoods; we are not out
to harm anybody or anyone's property. We are marketing to 15% of the public because we know
85% of the public says "I wouldn't live there if you gave me one of the $700,000 houses." We
are here to withstand the rights and interests of the 15 150 of whom have already voted with
their pocketbooks at the Village of WestClay. We want to be as responsive to the Commission's
specific concerns as can be. We would also hope that you will be responsive to our desire to take
this concept as we have explained ita high quality standard committed to —and say, "We think
this is fully consistent with the original vision of the project."
We are not about to come to you and say that we want to open discussion on the 2.0 density.
That is what we committed to, that is what we are living with, that is why we put aside one
million plus dollars in roadway improvements—we are only talking about a re- distribution.
Marilyn Anderson commented there is no cap on the 1.3 parcel, the 2.0 cap for the overall stays.
Mr. Huston responded the density could be as much as 1.7 and still comply with the Ordinance
because the other parts of the secondary area have complied. The density at south lake and north
lake is less than one unit per acre, so the aggregate density in the secondary district could be as
high as 1.7 or even 2.0, depending on how you draw the secondary district lines. This is a
concept question rather than a density question. At the end of the day, we are still at 1.3 in the
secondary area, 2.0 in the primary area as established in the Ordinance.
Norma Meighen was complimentary of the petitioner and said they had done a fine job thus far.
Norma was sure that George Sweet would not let this project fail and she had a lot of faith in him
and in this project and thought it was time to put the talks and lectures aside and move this
forward.
The Committee resumed the discussion following a short recess.
The petitioner is requesting home base office area increased from 600 square feet to 1,000 square
feet, which can be an accessory building with a sign.
Currently, home businesses are permitted in the "green" areas. Home businesses are allowed one
small sign and there is a restriction on the number of persons. Medical, dental, and real estate
offices are not permitted. In the single family area, office area as a special use is not permitted.
Office area would be permitted in any other single family zoning district in Clay Township, but it
is prohibited in the Village single family zoning. The most logical place for a 1,000 square foot
office, given the size of the lot, is above the garage.
Comments from members of the public:
S:AP1anCommission\ Minutes\ SubdivisionCoimnitteeMinutes \2002jun04 5
Tonia Guerrero, 2424 West 131S Street, due north of the new area under consideration, said they
have one house on 20 acres. Ms. Guerrero asked about the density on the proposed diagram if a
Church were approved; and the common area that is a baseball field.
Mr. Huston responded that if there were a church constructed on the area, the 24 lots presently
approved could be relocated within the project. However, it is entirely possible that the area
could be developed as initially proposed. There is no commercial area —only the baseball field
no Inn, no apartment building, no brownstones.
Department Report, Michael Hollibaugh. The Department is comfortable with the proposal and
the staff supports the current plan and supports the favorable recommendation of the Department.
Norma Meighen moved to recommend approval to the Commission of Docket Nos. 10 -02 Z,
Village of WestClay Rezone; 11 -02 OA, Village of WestClay PUD, Text Amendment; 12 -02
PP Amend, Village of WestClay, Primary Plat Amendment. The motion was seconded by
Wayne Haney and APPROVED 4 -0.
There being no further business to come before the Committee, the meeting was adjourned at
9:25 PM.
Dave Cremeans, Chairperson
Ramona Hancock, Secretary
S:AP1anCommission\ Minutes\ SubdivisionCoimnitteeMinutes \2002jun04